Wild dogs pose for the D300

The other day I went to a one horse village called Runa, close to my home in
Portugal, to take some pictures of an abandoned RR station, when I saw these
two wild dogs. I tried my best to have them come to me, but no way. They did
seem to like the D300, because they took turns in posing for me!

When I came home, I looked at the pictures and they all seemed out of focus!
I finally found it: the dynamic focus area was set to 51 point 3D. Now I
assumed it would not be active if you choose Single point AF with the AF
area selector. But it doesn't seem to focus on the target. Look at the
pictures. I focused on the dogs heads, but they are not sharp. It seems
right after or before they are. Is this a flaw or overlooked issue? I talked
to the importer and they were very eager to get my camera fixed. Like they
knew about it? Maybe I just overlooked something, but the manual isn't very
helpful either. Anybody know why?

Another question is the AF Area selection. Why would you choose 9 or 21
points if you have 51? Does it save battery time? Does it have other
advantages?

Even if you have the AF selector on single or dynamic and in the menu you
have 9 points, you can still choose any of the 51 points. Any answers?

Advertisements

Sosumi wrote:
> The other day I went to a one horse village called Runa, close to my home in
> Portugal, to take some pictures of an abandoned RR station, when I saw these
> two wild dogs. I tried my best to have them come to me, but no way. They did
> seem to like the D300, because they took turns in posing for me!
>
> When I came home, I looked at the pictures and they all seemed out of focus!
> I finally found it: the dynamic focus area was set to 51 point 3D. Now I
> assumed it would not be active if you choose Single point AF with the AF
> area selector. But it doesn't seem to focus on the target. Look at the
> pictures. I focused on the dogs heads, but they are not sharp. It seems
> right after or before they are. Is this a flaw or overlooked issue? I talked
> to the importer and they were very eager to get my camera fixed. Like they
> knew about it? Maybe I just overlooked something, but the manual isn't very
> helpful either. Anybody know why?
>
> Another question is the AF Area selection. Why would you choose 9 or 21
> points if you have 51? Does it save battery time? Does it have other
> advantages?
>
> Even if you have the AF selector on single or dynamic and in the menu you
> have 9 points, you can still choose any of the 51 points. Any answers?
>
> Sorry, I'm a little lost, like my two new RR dog friends ;-)
>
> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog1.jpg
>
> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog2.jpg
>
> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog3.jpg
>
> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog4.jpg
>
> Aren't they precious?

All the shots you show are focused as I would expect the wide area
dynamic focus to work. It has selected the target of most contrast -
which is what it always does - and you probably have the custom option
for avoiding refocusing on passing foreground objects enabled (can't
remember what option this is, but it stops the focus resetting if you
are tracking a subject and a fencepost gets in front etc). This makes
the wide area focus prefer backgrounds - with it turned off, the WA
focus will generally prefer the closest area of high contrast detail.

Your dogs are too insignificant and dark compared to the strong hard
edges of the railroad or the grass and weeds. You would have to use spot
focus and lock to get these right.

Advertisements

"David Kilpatrick" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Sosumi wrote:
>> The other day I went to a one horse village called Runa, close to my home
>> in Portugal, to take some pictures of an abandoned RR station, when I saw
>> these two wild dogs. I tried my best to have them come to me, but no way.
>> They did seem to like the D300, because they took turns in posing for me!
>>
>> When I came home, I looked at the pictures and they all seemed out of
>> focus! I finally found it: the dynamic focus area was set to 51 point 3D.
>> Now I assumed it would not be active if you choose Single point AF with
>> the AF area selector. But it doesn't seem to focus on the target. Look at
>> the pictures. I focused on the dogs heads, but they are not sharp. It
>> seems right after or before they are. Is this a flaw or overlooked issue?
>> I talked to the importer and they were very eager to get my camera fixed.
>> Like they knew about it? Maybe I just overlooked something, but the
>> manual isn't very helpful either. Anybody know why?
>>
>> Another question is the AF Area selection. Why would you choose 9 or 21
>> points if you have 51? Does it save battery time? Does it have other
>> advantages?
>>
>> Even if you have the AF selector on single or dynamic and in the menu you
>> have 9 points, you can still choose any of the 51 points. Any answers?
>>
>> Sorry, I'm a little lost, like my two new RR dog friends ;-)
>>
>> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog1.jpg
>>
>> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog2.jpg
>>
>> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog3.jpg
>>
>> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog4.jpg
>>
>> Aren't they precious?
>
> All the shots you show are focused as I would expect the wide area dynamic
> focus to work. It has selected the target of most contrast - which is what
> it always does - and you probably have the custom option for avoiding
> refocusing on passing foreground objects enabled (can't remember what
> option this is, but it stops the focus resetting if you are tracking a
> subject and a fencepost gets in front etc). This makes the wide area focus
> prefer backgrounds - with it turned off, the WA focus will generally
> prefer the closest area of high contrast detail.
>
> Your dogs are too insignificant and dark compared to the strong hard edges
> of the railroad or the grass and weeds. You would have to use spot focus
> and lock to get these right.
>
> David

So let me get this straight: even if you have the AF area selector on Single
Point AF (!), but the menu on 51 point 3D and you have the object in the
middle point selected, it beeps, it still looks for another contrast place?

Guest

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 11:26:42 -0000, in rec.photo.digital "Sosumi"
<> wrote:
>The other day I went to a one horse village called Runa, close to my home in
>Portugal, to take some pictures of an abandoned RR station, when I saw these
>two wild dogs. I tried my best to have them come to me, but no way. They did
>seem to like the D300, because they took turns in posing for me!
>
>When I came home, I looked at the pictures and they all seemed out of focus!
>I finally found it: the dynamic focus area was set to 51 point 3D. Now I
>assumed it would not be active if you choose Single point AF with the AF
>area selector. But it doesn't seem to focus on the target. Look at the
>pictures. I focused on the dogs heads, but they are not sharp. It seems
>right after or before they are. Is this a flaw or overlooked issue? I talked
>to the importer and they were very eager to get my camera fixed. Like they
>knew about it? Maybe I just overlooked something, but the manual isn't very
>helpful either. Anybody know why?
>
>Another question is the AF Area selection. Why would you choose 9 or 21
>points if you have 51? Does it save battery time? Does it have other
>advantages?
>
>Even if you have the AF selector on single or dynamic and in the menu you
>have 9 points, you can still choose any of the 51 points. Any answers?
>
>Sorry, I'm a little lost, like my two new RR dog friends ;-)
>
>http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog1.jpg
>
>http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog2.jpg
>
>http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog3.jpg
>
>http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog4.jpg
>
>Aren't they precious?

On 12/31/07 8:21 AM, in article ,
"" <> wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 11:26:42 -0000, in rec.photo.digital "Sosumi"
> <> wrote:
>
>> The other day I went to a one horse village called Runa, close to my home in
>> Portugal, to take some pictures of an abandoned RR station, when I saw these
>> two wild dogs. I tried my best to have them come to me, but no way. They did
>> seem to like the D300, because they took turns in posing for me!
>>
>> When I came home, I looked at the pictures and they all seemed out of focus!
>> I finally found it: the dynamic focus area was set to 51 point 3D. Now I
>> assumed it would not be active if you choose Single point AF with the AF
>> area selector. But it doesn't seem to focus on the target. Look at the
>> pictures. I focused on the dogs heads, but they are not sharp. It seems
>> right after or before they are. Is this a flaw or overlooked issue? I talked
>> to the importer and they were very eager to get my camera fixed. Like they
>> knew about it? Maybe I just overlooked something, but the manual isn't very
>> helpful either. Anybody know why?
>>
>> Another question is the AF Area selection. Why would you choose 9 or 21
>> points if you have 51? Does it save battery time? Does it have other
>> advantages?
>>
>> Even if you have the AF selector on single or dynamic and in the menu you
>> have 9 points, you can still choose any of the 51 points. Any answers?
>>
>> Sorry, I'm a little lost, like my two new RR dog friends ;-)
>>
>> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog1.jpg
>>
>> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog2.jpg
>>
>> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog3.jpg
>>
>> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog4.jpg
>>
>> Aren't they precious?
>
>
> Perhaps it's time to RTFM and take the camera out of AF-C mode?
And have to MANUAL focus?!? The HORROR!!!!

Sosumi wrote:
>
> So let me get this straight: even if you have the AF area selector on Single
> Point AF (!), but the menu on 51 point 3D and you have the object in the
> middle point selected, it beeps, it still looks for another contrast place?
>
>
No idea. When testing the D300 and D3, I used spot central focus not
wide area for standard aim-lock subjects. I used dynamic wide area for
moving targets without any manual interference. Both options seem
logical and both worked fine. If I used the dynamic wide area for static
subejcts, I nearly always ended up with the wrong thing in focus
(typically, the foreground) so I quit doing that after my first dozen or
so reviewed shots. It was easy enough to tell from the rear screen
review whether things were going as I wanted.

Guest

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 09:21:12 -0600, in rec.photo.digital George Kerby
<> wrote:
>On 12/31/07 8:21 AM, in article ,
>"" <> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 11:26:42 -0000, in rec.photo.digital "Sosumi"
>> <> wrote:
>>> When I came home, I looked at the pictures and they all seemed out of focus!
>>> I finally found it: the dynamic focus area was set to 51 point 3D. Now I
>>> assumed it would not be active if you choose Single point AF with the AF
>>> area selector. But it doesn't seem to focus on the target. Look at the
>>> pictures. I focused on the dogs heads, but they are not sharp. It seems
>>> right after or before they are. Is this a flaw or overlooked issue? I talked
>>> to the importer and they were very eager to get my camera fixed. Like they
>>> knew about it? Maybe I just overlooked something, but the manual isn't very
>>> helpful either. Anybody know why?
>>>
>>> Another question is the AF Area selection. Why would you choose 9 or 21
>>> points if you have 51? Does it save battery time? Does it have other
>>> advantages?
>>>
>>> Even if you have the AF selector on single or dynamic and in the menu you
>>> have 9 points, you can still choose any of the 51 points. Any answers?
>>>
>>> Sorry, I'm a little lost, like my two new RR dog friends ;-)
>>>
>>> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog1.jpg
>>
> Perhaps it's time to RTFM and take the camera out of AF-C mode?
>And have to MANUAL focus?!? The HORROR!!!!

No one is suggesting MF. AF-C by default will release the shutter when the
camera hasn't locked focus (see options for release), there are also other
interactions with dynamic FA.

In the end it just might be that even the newer implementation of AF-C in
the D300 still is lacking when it comes to stationary or near stationary
subjects. I' have found that to be the case for the D200, and also the D70
which lack the release setting option of the D200/D300.

On Dec 31, 11:51 am, wrote:
>
> In the end it just might be that even the newer implementation of AF-C in
> the D300 still is lacking when it comes to stationary or near stationary
> subjects. I' have found that to be the case for the D200, and also the D70
> which lack the release setting option of the D200/D300

Maybe they will come out with a firmware upgrade to fix the problem.
It is sad that Nikon floods the market with these prototypes without
doing proper in-house testing. Do they think their customers are beta-
testers?

Annika1980 wrote:
>> In the end it just might be that even the newer implementation of
>> AF-C in the D300 still is lacking when it comes to stationary or
>> near stationary subjects. I' have found that to be the case for the
>> D200, and also the D70 which lack the release setting option of the
>> D200/D300
>
> Maybe they will come out with a firmware upgrade to fix the problem.
> It is sad that Nikon floods the market with these prototypes without
> doing proper in-house testing. Do they think their customers are beta-
> testers?

LOL! Canon had to do something with all the faulty AF focusing units left
over from the Mk III fiasco. Do you think they are stupid enough to throw
them out?

Guest

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 08:59:24 -0800 (PST), in rec.photo.digital Annika1980
<> wrote:
>On Dec 31, 11:51 am, wrote:
>>
>> In the end it just might be that even the newer implementation of AF-C in
>> the D300 still is lacking when it comes to stationary or near stationary
>> subjects. I' have found that to be the case for the D200, and also the D70
>> which lack the release setting option of the D200/D300
>
>Maybe they will come out with a firmware upgrade to fix the problem.
>It is sad that Nikon floods the market with these prototypes without
>doing proper in-house testing. Do they think their customers are beta-
>testers?

On Dec 31, 4:07 pm, wrote:
> >Maybe they will come out with a firmware upgrade to fix the problem.
> >It is sad that Nikon floods the market with these prototypes without
> >doing proper in-house testing. Do they think their customers are beta-
> >testers?
>
> They are just following Canon's lead, no?

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 17:23:24 -0600, Annika1980 wrote
(in article
<>):
> On Dec 31, 4:07 pm, wrote:
>
>>> Maybe they will come out with a firmware upgrade to fix the problem.
>>> It is sad that Nikon floods the market with these prototypes without
>>> doing proper in-house testing. Do they think their customers are beta-
>>> testers?
>>
>> They are just following Canon's lead, no?
>
> You said it. Canon leads, Nikon follows.
> Canon Rules and Nikon Drools.

Canon Fanbois Drool and Nikon users just laugh at them.

--
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)
"The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those
who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

On Dec 31 2007, 9:26 pm, "Sosumi" <> wrote:
> The other day I went to a one horse village called Runa, close to my home in
> Portugal, to take some pictures of an abandoned RR station, when I saw these
> two wild dogs. I tried my best to have them come to me, but no way. They did
> seem to like the D300, because they took turns in posing for me!
>
> When I came home, I looked at the pictures and they all seemed out of focus!
> I finally found it: the dynamic focus area was set to 51 point 3D. Now I
> assumed it would not be active if you choose Single point AF with the AF
> area selector. But it doesn't seem to focus on the target. Look at the
> pictures. I focused on the dogs heads, but they are not sharp. It seems
> right after or before they are. Is this a flaw or overlooked issue? I talked
> to the importer and they were very eager to get my camera fixed. Like they
> knew about it? Maybe I just overlooked something, but the manual isn't very
> helpful either. Anybody know why?
>
> Another question is the AF Area selection. Why would you choose 9 or 21
> points if you have 51? Does it save battery time? Does it have other
> advantages?
>
> Even if you have the AF selector on single or dynamic and in the menu you
> have 9 points, you can still choose any of the 51 points. Any answers?
>
> Sorry, I'm a little lost, like my two new RR dog friends ;-)
>
> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog1.jpg
>
> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog2.jpg
>
> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog3.jpg
>
> http://atlantic-diesel.com/Dog4.jpg
>
> Aren't they precious?
> --
> Sosumi

Hey Sosumi?
Those bolts holding the rails in place were called "dogs" by the
"fettlers" who used to drive the spikes into sleepers as they made the
railways of the world. I know because I worked on the "trans
Australian" standard gauge line across Australia's widest expanse of
country back in about 1965. The paymaster used to motor out in an old
1937 Daimler converted for rail travel. No steering wheel, just a
driver's seat and a back seat for the paymaster.

In those old days it went: Sleepers then "fish plates" onto which went
the rails and then the dogs were driven into holes bored in the
sleepers with a hand auger. A "wild dog" was when you missed the spike
with your hammer and hit the line itself. Do it more than a few times
a day and you got your "marching papers" (fired).

I think a far more compelling picture is there than just rail lines
with a dog. Of course they no longer use wooden sleepers and spikes
but it is none the less a very valuable part of the history of rail
and could turn your photo into a memorable work of art if you can just
find a man made rail line to photograph and show the comparison.
Personally I think the rail lines are a compelling image alone. The
dog destroys or at least detracts from an otherwise excellent photo.

On 2007-12-31 03:26:42 -0800, "Sosumi" <> said:
> The other day I went to a one horse village called Runa, close to my home in
> Portugal, to take some pictures of an abandoned RR station, when I saw these
> two wild dogs.

Those dogs look like they are either very small, about the size of
chihuahuas, or the tracks are huge. They must be puppies?

Guest

On Jan 1, 3:23 pm, "Prisilla, Queen of the Desert"
<> wrote:
> I know because I worked on the "trans
> Australian" standard gauge line across Australia's widest expanse of
> country back in about 1965. The paymaster used to motor out in an old
> 1937 Daimler converted for rail travel. No steering wheel, just a
> driver's seat and a back seat for the paymaster.

Fascinating story... But the trans australia rail line was completed
in 1917. Perhasp Prissy is referring to repair work, or some of the
alterations in the 60's to fix the gauge-change problems..

So when and where was this, exactly, Prissy? I presume it is
documented in some museum somewhere? I'm fascinated by rail history
and would love to see more information about this, but there is
nothing on the Internet about it, unless I'm missing something...

"C J Campbell" <> wrote in message
news:2008010116121727544-christophercampbell@hotmailcom...
> On 2007-12-31 03:26:42 -0800, "Sosumi" <> said:
>
>> The other day I went to a one horse village called Runa, close to my home
>> in
>> Portugal, to take some pictures of an abandoned RR station, when I saw
>> these
>> two wild dogs.
>
> Those dogs look like they are either very small, about the size of
> chihuahuas, or the tracks are huge. They must be puppies?
>

They are pretty small, but bigger than any Chihuahuas I've ever seen.
The one with longer hair is an adult male, probably 2-3 years old and likely
some terrier or schnauzer in it.
The other seems more like a puppy; maybe 6 months or so. He or she was also
very playful. Looks like some pincher blood.

Funny characters, to find a home in a sort of sewer, so close to the tracks.
But they seems smart enough to survive. Maybe some people are feeding them.
The male started warning me yesterday with a big GRRRR.

Ï "Sosumi" <> Ýãñáøå óôï ìÞíõìá
news:...
>
> "C J Campbell" <> wrote in message
> news:2008010116121727544-christophercampbell@hotmailcom...
> > On 2007-12-31 03:26:42 -0800, "Sosumi" <> said:
> >
> >> The other day I went to a one horse village called Runa, close to my
home
> >> in
> >> Portugal, to take some pictures of an abandoned RR station, when I saw
> >> these
> >> two wild dogs.
> >
> > Those dogs look like they are either very small, about the size of
> > chihuahuas, or the tracks are huge. They must be puppies?
> >
>
> They are pretty small, but bigger than any Chihuahuas I've ever seen.
> The one with longer hair is an adult male, probably 2-3 years old and
likely
> some terrier or schnauzer in it.
> The other seems more like a puppy; maybe 6 months or so. He or she was
also
> very playful. Looks like some pincher blood.
>
> Funny characters, to find a home in a sort of sewer, so close to the
tracks.
> But they seems smart enough to survive. Maybe some people are feeding
them.
> The male started warning me yesterday with a big GRRRR.
>
Next time, come with a cat bodyguard.Meowww!www.picato.net

Tzortzakakis Dimitrios wrote:
<snip>
> Next time, come with a cat bodyguard.Meowww!

Good suggestion. Two years ago my wife got a then-one-year-old black and
tan hound. We have two cats, then 14 years old. The cats didn't really
take to the dog (understatement) then or now. The dog will approach the
larger of the cats (about 8 pounds) but is absolutely terrified of the
smaller (about 4 or 5 pounds) who emits a very soft growl whenever the
dog accidentally gets near. This growl, though very low volume, sounds
like it is coming from an animal at least as large as the dog. Never
underestimate a cat.
Allen

<> wrote in message
news:...
> On Jan 1, 3:23 pm, "Prisilla, Queen of the Desert"
> <> wrote:
>> I know because I worked on the "trans
>> Australian" standard gauge line across Australia's widest expanse of
>> country back in about 1965. The paymaster used to motor out in an old
>> 1937 Daimler converted for rail travel. No steering wheel, just a
>> driver's seat and a back seat for the paymaster.
>
> Fascinating story... But the trans australia rail line was completed
> in 1917. Perhasp Prissy is referring to repair work, or some of the
> alterations in the 60's to fix the gauge-change problems..
>
> So when and where was this, exactly, Prissy? I presume it is
> documented in some museum somewhere? I'm fascinated by rail history
> and would love to see more information about this, but there is
> nothing on the Internet about it, unless I'm missing something...
>
>

Here you go again... Spouting bullshit for the sake of hearing the keyboard
rattle. Not only bullshit but slander too. Your behaviour never changes,
does it?

Here is the truth... Something Mark Thomas AKA Charles Stevens (neither are
names he uses in real life) has no regard for.

Not only has he got the date wrong by 5 years but for someone claiming to
have lived in the area the line passes through, he hasn't a clue about it.

The Trans Australian Railway was started in 1910 and took two years to
construct, connecting the Eastern States with West Australia's Government
Rail at Kalgoorlie.

It took 70 years more to get the transcontinental connection of the Indian
Pacific train as a single gauge trip across the country from Sydney to
Perth.

(end of quote)

Using my advanced algorithm to calculate this complex math, I arrived at the
date of 1980 as the time the *STANDARD GAUGE* conversion was finished.

I have no idea what the poster whom you are slandering meant with their
dates but very clearly you are showing your own stupidity in attacking
him/her on a matter a 12 year old could verify in a Google instant.

Exactly what is it about you "Mark" that has you making such a total idiot
out of yourself all the time? Are you so obsessed with me that you can't
think straight? Come on teach... Get it right or next year you'll be back in
the bubs again... If you'll still have a job that is.

Share This Page

Welcome to Velocity Reviews!

Welcome to the Velocity Reviews, the place to come for the latest tech news and reviews.

Please join our friendly community by clicking the button below - it only takes a few seconds and is totally free. You'll be able to chat with other enthusiasts and get tech help from other members.
Sign up now!